Judging our courts

"A judge's act of tossing a coin in a courtroom to decide a legal issue pending before the court suggests that courts do not decide cases on their merits, but instead subject litigants to games of chance in serious matters without regard to the evidence or applicable law," the court said.

Really? Why would anyone suspect the courts decide things based on public opinion or political leanings rather than the letter and intent of the law? We have entered an age in which what is right or wrong is a malleable thing, a moving target. People pick and choose which laws apply or they wish to obey based on whether it suits their desires of the moment.

Take the (in)famous Jammie Thomas (Thompson?). She decided she wanted to post some musical files on a peer to peer file sharing network, admitted she knew it was illegal, manipulated her hard drive to try to hide the evidence, and now is complaining because she was prosecuted.

Well...I happen to agree with some of the things she has had to say. But you will never find me posting a file illegally to one of those sites for the simple reason that it is illegal whether I agree with it or not.

Nor will you ever find me murdering a doctor for murdering babies. The sword was given to government, not to me. Abortion is immoral and indefensible in every sense of the word...but it is also the law of the land and as such I am not going to break the law just because I happen to disagree with it.

Of course, those same laws and public opinions over what is right and what is wrong have gotten us into sticky situations such as the one that judge was in when he performed the coin flip.

Society has so changed the intent, meaning, and durability of marriages that they have become like the way a friend once described the (at the time) cheapest cars on the market, Kias...one little accident, you just throw it away and get another one.

Except, unlike Kias, there are other things involved...friends, families, emotions, hopes, dreams...and the damage is far more lasting.

Take the incident referenced above. It seems the judge finds that both parents are qualified to provide what the state believes is adequate care. How do you choose who to give custody to? What if the merits are equal, how does one come to a decision?

It is a sticky situation that is made worse by the attitudes towards divorce today. Any argument or fight and instead of working things out, figuring out how to get along and grow their marriage, instead people just head for the courthouse, split their stuff...including the kids...and go on their merry little way, often enough into new relationships even before the divorce is finalized.

And this behavior is not just condoned, it is encouraged. Every day we hear idiots talking about how wrong it is to stay together "for the sake of the kids". Oh, yeah, much better to destabilize their environment, pass them from hand to hand, talk about which weekends you "get them", choose for them...whether the kid likes it or not...where and how they will spend weekends and holidays.

If anything, this judge should be commended for spotlighting the flaws we as a society of loose morals have created and pointing out the loose interpretation of the family structure is among the most destructive effects in existence today. But of course...that won't make sense to many people, so let's let it lay.